Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:

> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?

Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm <adm1@fastmail.fm>
writes
>On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>><alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in
>>>London?
>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>
>Or take picture of other people's children.

You can do that.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

Chris H wrote:
> In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm <adm1@fastmail.fm>
> writes
>> On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>>
>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>>
>> Or take picture of other people's children.
>
> You can do that.

You can tie a rope around your neck and jump off a high building too,
but in both cases the results are likely to be less than pleasant.

Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a guy
out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a shopping
mall's kid's playground. He refused to hand over the film, I punched him
out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took the film. We both
got arrested, I got released, he, after a search of his home, got a
prison sentence. Nothing is new, just better publicised.

You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if you
are smart. On the other hand, I have seen kids who are real cuteys and
have asked the parent/guardian if I could photograph them simply because
they are so cute and have never been refused. Like Jimmy Durante, I like
little girls - but not in a nasty way (I have quite a few of my own
along with a cute wife). They can be fascinating to photograph,
particularly when they are precocious.

PK

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

Penis Kolada <this@that.com> wrote:
>Chris H wrote:
>> In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm <adm1@fastmail.fm>
>> writes
>>> On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>>>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>>>
>>> Or take picture of other people's children.
>>
>> You can do that.
>
>You can tie a rope around your neck and jump off a high building too,
>but in both cases the results are likely to be less than pleasant.
>
>Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a guy
>out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a shopping
>mall's kid's playground. He refused to hand over the film, I punched him
>out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took the film.

Remarkably stupid of you since that is a felony.

> We both
>got arrested, I got released,

You're very lucky.

>You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if you
>are smart.

How special. Threats from a thug.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

Ray Fischer wrote:
> Penis Kolada <this@that.com> wrote:
>> Chris H wrote:
>>> In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm <adm1@fastmail.fm>
>>> writes
>>>> On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>>>>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>>>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>>>> Or take picture of other people's children.
>>> You can do that.
>> You can tie a rope around your neck and jump off a high building too,
>> but in both cases the results are likely to be less than pleasant.
>>
>> Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a guy
>> out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a shopping
>> mall's kid's playground. He refused to hand over the film, I punched him
>> out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took the film.
>
> Remarkably stupid of you since that is a felony.

No, it is only a misdemeanor when you are provoked.

>
>> We both
>> got arrested, I got released,
>
> You're very lucky.

No, I was within my rights. The Police accepted that. I was not in a
public place and had refused permission.

>
>> You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if you
>> are smart.
>
> How special. Threats from a thug.

No, just from a parent.

PK

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

On 26 Jun 2008 07:50:58 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Penis Kolada <this@that.com> wrote:
>>Chris H wrote:
>>> In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm <adm1@fastmail.fm>
>>> writes
>>>> On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>>>>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>>>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>>>>
>>>> Or take picture of other people's children.
>>>
>>> You can do that.
>>
>>You can tie a rope around your neck and jump off a high building too,
>>but in both cases the results are likely to be less than pleasant.
>>
>>Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a guy
>>out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a shopping
>>mall's kid's playground. He refused to hand over the film, I punched him
>>out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took the film.
>
>Remarkably stupid of you since that is a felony.
>
>> We both
>>got arrested, I got released,
>
>You're very lucky.
>
>>You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if you
>>are smart.
>
>How special. Threats from a thug.

His nom de plume or whatever says it all, Penis Kolada!!!!

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

In message <6cgqpdF2tklvqU1@mid.individual.net>, Penis Kolada
<this@that.com> writes
>Chris H wrote:
>> In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm
>><adm1@fastmail.fm> writes
>>> On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>>>><alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>>>
>>> Or take picture of other people's children.
>> You can do that.
>
>You can tie a rope around your neck and jump off a high building too,
>but in both cases the results are likely to be less than pleasant.

True

>Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a guy
>out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a shopping
>mall's kid's playground.

Then you are guilty of assault. And so far he is guilty of nothing.

> He refused to hand over the film,

He does not have to

> I punched him out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took
>the film.

Assault and theft. Damaging property (the film) you had and still have
no right to do any of that.

> We both got arrested,
Good.

> I got released,
I hope you were charged with assault though.

> he, after a search of his home, got a prison sentence.
What for?

>You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if you
>are smart.

Define inappropriate. It is quite legal to take pictures of "people" in
a public place. Had you assaulted me in the way you describe I can
assure you nothing incriminating would have been found at my house (I
have nothing incriminating) and I would have preferred charges.

You were VERY lucky the person you assaulted was a pedophile.

>On the other hand, I have seen kids who are real cuteys and have asked
>the parent/guardian if I could photograph them simply because they are
>so cute and have never been refused.

I agree that is the correct way to do it . I always carry ID, the home
office letter, the UK photographers rights leaflet, a model release and
the contact details fore the news library I send photos to.

On the other had I have no interest in photographing children cute or
otherwise.

> Like Jimmy Durante, I like little girls - but not in a nasty way (I
>have quite a few of my own along with a cute wife). They can be
>fascinating to photograph, particularly when they are precocious.

Some times... I'm not into "cute"


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

In message <6ch4dlF3ftnnoU1@mid.individual.net>, Penis Kolada
<this@that.com> writes
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Penis Kolada <this@that.com> wrote:
>>> Chris H wrote:
>>>> In message <2008062523020116807-adm1@fastmailfm>, adm
>>>><adm1@fastmail.fm> writes
>>>>> On 2008-06-25 22:53:06 +0100, snapper@mailinator.com said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>>>>>><alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>>>>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>>>>> Or take picture of other people's children.
>>>> You can do that.
>>> You can tie a rope around your neck and jump off a high building
>>>too, but in both cases the results are likely to be less than pleasant.
>>>
>>> Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a
>>>guy out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a
>>>shopping mall's kid's playground. He refused to hand over the film, I
>>>him out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took the film.
>> Remarkably stupid of you since that is a felony.
>
>No, it is only a misdemeanor when you are provoked.

I suppose we would have to have seen the incident to know.

>>> We both got arrested, I got released,
>> You're very lucky.
>
>No, I was within my rights.

CRAP. Assault is still assault

>The Police accepted that.

They are often wrong.

>I was not in a public place and had refused permission.
YOU had refused permission but it is not up to you. It is up to the
owners of the place you were in,.

However I would have thought a pedophile would not have wanted to draw
attention and disappeared when you first accosted him

>>> You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if
>>>you are smart.
>> How special. Threats from a thug.
>
>No, just from a parent.

A thug.
You attacked first.

This is why a load of "responsible parents" in Plymouth/ Portsmouth(?)
attacked a paediatrician they reacted in a paranoid and illegal way.

Had the photographer NOT actually been a pedophile you may have had a
custodial sentence. Mob rule is something we don't need.

(And yes I do have children)





--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

In message <gv2dnZITIOrI1P7VnZ2dnUVZ8uydnZ2d@bt.com>, Neil Ellwood
<cral.elllwood2@bt.openworld.com> writes
>On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:53:06 +1000, snapper wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:04:42 +0200, Alfred Molon
>> <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What restrictions are there for photography in public places in London?
>>
>> Main thing is that you shouldn't be dressed as an Arab.
>
>And a camera helps.
>

Not in the current paranoid climate... just a brown skin, a beard and a
turban. Camera is optional...
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: Photography restrictions in London
 

Penis Kolada <this@that.com> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Penis Kolada <this@that.com> wrote:

>>> Way before all this current fuss, back in the eighties, I punched a guy
>>> out for taking photographs of my four year old daughter in a shopping
>>> mall's kid's playground. He refused to hand over the film, I punched him
>>> out and took it - didn't damage the camera, just took the film.
>>
>> Remarkably stupid of you since that is a felony.
>
>No, it is only a misdemeanor when you are provoked.

Taking pictures is not provation. Strong-arm robbery is a felony.

>>> We both
>>> got arrested, I got released,
>>
>> You're very lucky.
>
>No, I was within my rights.

You have no right to commit robbery. You could have ended up DEAD.

> The Police accepted that.

The police are often stupid. You got lucky.

> I was not in a
>public place and had refused permission.

Yes, you were in a public place. Shapping malls count as such.

>>> You *don't* show inappropriate interest in other people's kids if you
>>> are smart.
>>
>> How special. Threats from a thug.
>
>No, just from a parent.

Not all parents are thugs.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net